-------------------------------------------------
Subject: Managerial Accounting Case 1 Seligram
In the Seligram case, the existing cost accounting system measured two components of cost: direct labor and burden. All burden cost, which is the overhead, was grouped into a single cost pool and was calculated only by using a burden rate per direct labor dollar. This may cause problems since direct labor and overhead are not consumed by the products in the same proportion. Simply using the same burden rate is obsolescent. First of all, direct labor hours per lot tested had been steadily declining, especially with the increase of dependence on vendor certification. This will result in the change of the burden rate. Besides, this system
…show more content…
Assuming that new equipment has a separate cost center, all variable cost, fixed cost and depreciation will be reported separately. The burden rate is only based on the machine hours of new equipment which are 400hr (Year1) and 2400hr (Year2-8). Additionally, we use Double-decline method for depreciation. Balance is shown in Exhibit4. The separate burden rate for Year 1 would be much higher than those in the following years due to set up costs (Exhibit 5). Burden rates combined with main testing room are calculated in Exhibit 6.
All combined burden rates are much lower than the separate costing rates. We recommend choosing a separate cost center for new equipment, even though the rates are much higher. Due to the current situation that lower costs for more complex components, which is abnormal, separate method would reflect more accurate and reliable costs of new imported machines. Obviously, combined method would influence the presentation of true costs. The costs are reduced by other factors in main testing room. Higher burden rates are more reasonable that these new machines have higher cost in essence and also they are just for testing components from several specific clients. Higher burden rates are more
The focus of EEC’s investment of the purchasing of the supplier is to cut down on
a service department’s costs have been allocated, costs are not reallocated back to it under
Wilkerson employs a Normal Cost System, which means that they use predetermined overhead rates along with actual costs for direct material and direct labor. Normal costing systems are appropriate when overhead costs are a relatively small percentage of total manufacturing costs and product diversity is limited. For Wilkerson, normal costing does not make sense. Overhead costs make up over 50 percent of total manufacturing costs and their product offering is relatively more diverse. This indicates that the current accounting system in place may be distorting costs significantly. Supporting data:
The wages of general production employees who are idled due to machine breakdown are classified as indirect costs. Direct costs are usually variable and change as production volumes change. Thus, direct materials and direct labor are typically variable costs. For special orders, some direct costs can be fixed, however. The costs (depreciation, electricity, and routine maintenance) associated with a machine dedicated to one product are direct costs of that product. Indirect costs cannot be easily and conveniently assigned to a special order. Rather, these costs are common costs, in that they are incurred to produce a variety of special orders. Maintenance costs of general purpose equipment, the supervisor’s salary, and utilities are direct costs needed to produce special orders in general, but are indirect costs for a particular special order. Moreover, general production costs, including property taxes, insurance, lawn care, cafeteria costs, and miscellaneous supplies consumed in production are indirect costs properly allocated to special orders manufactured.
According to the fact of this case, Parent Co. (Parent) wholly owns Poor Son Co. (Poor Son) as a legal subsidiary, and both of them all nonpublic companies. However, in January 2007 Poor Son filed a voluntary bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. bankruptcy code because of its inability of meet obligations as they became due. Then, Parent claimed the loss of control of Poor Son and deconsolidated Poor Son from its financial statement. Through the bidding process in May 2009, Poor Son and OtherCo, the winning sponsor, filed a joint plan of reorganization to the bankruptcy court, but the plan was rescinded by OtherCo later due to significant market value shrink of Poor Son. After that, the
Due to the information, 20 acres of land equal 80 sheep according to the exchange rate of last year, a one-room cabin equal 3 acres of land and equal 12 sheep finally, a plow equals 2 goat and equal 2/3 sheep according to last year’s exchange rate and 2 carts which were traded with a poor acre of land equals 8 sheep plus 400 sheep. So Deyonne’s total assets are 500(2/3) sheep. Deyonne’s liabilities and assets deduction are 35 sheep plus 3 sheep, which will come to 38 sheep,
Historic cost depreciation is being used which leads to skewed numbers that misrepresent how well a product line will continue to operate in the future due to understated replacement value of fixed assets.
Overhead costs include rent, office staff, depreciation, and other. Once the flexible budget was complete, variances between the actual and flexible budget could be calculated (Exhibit B). The variance for frame assembly was favorable with actual costs being $82,663 less than in the flexible budget. The variances for wheel and final assembly however were both unfavorable. Wheel assembly had an unfavorable variance of $50,650, while final assembly variance was the highest at an unfavorable variance of $231,200. Taking into account these three aspects of direct cost, direct cost has an unfavorable variance $199,187. Although most overhead costs are fixed, 2/3 of other costs are variable and increase with the increased production. As shown in Exhibit B, overhead variance is unfavorable at $60,000. The direct cost variance and overhead variable together lead to a total unfavorable variance of $259,187.
Under the existing cost system for the turning machine area, there are two direct costs and three cost pools for overhead costs. The two direct costs are simply Direct Labor and Direct Material, which are traced to the cost object, which is Machine Parts. The total overhead is split into three cost pools, which are the following: overhead applied on direct labor, overhead applied on material dollars, and overhead applied on ACTS machine hours. Furthermore, each cost pool is broken down into direct and period sub categories. The mentioned cost pools for the following cost drivers: Direct Labor dollars, Material dollars, and machine hours.
• This cost method does not provide the best system for JDCW’s cost allocation. By using only three overhead rates the present system grossly undermines the true production costs since other activities of the production process are not acknowledged.
1. Use the Overhead Cost Activity Analysis in Exhibit 5 and other data on manufacturing
Company operates in the Industrial Sector – Services, and Industry – Regional Airlines. According to the Standard Industrial Classification System (SIC), company belongs to the industry group 451: Air
The current method of apportioning production overheads based on direct labour hours can be described as a traditional approach to product costing. In a manufacturing company’s financial statements, each item produced must be allocated some of the production overheads to make the statements compliant. Sometimes the individual costs of these items can be calculated incorrectly based on overall production overhead and the system of allocating in place, however the overall financial statement can still be accurate. This traditional method of allocating the production
Under the new cost system, two broad sources of costs were identified: manufacturing and SM&A. All costs within these categories were reclassified as either volume driven or order driven. Hence, four cost pools were set up.